BHAGWAN VITHAL DEOKAR Vs. NARENDRA PADMAKAR YAVALEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Application is filed by the tenant against the order of the District Judge at Pune dismissing the Petitioner s Appeal and confirming the judgment of the Additional Judge, Small Causes Court, Pune, and directing the Respondents to hand over possession of the suit premises to the Respondents.

(2.) I see no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact. Indeed, I find the conclusions reached by both the Courts below on these questions, to be well founded in law, on facts and even in equity.

(3.) Respondent No.1, the landlord had filed a civil suit against the tenants viz. the Petitioner and the other Respondents for possession, arrears of rent and mesne profits. The suit premises were given on lease to the Petitioner s father who carried on business as a gold smith therein. The suit was based on various grounds. Respondent No.1 succeeded on the ground that he required the suit premises bona-fide and reasonably for his own use and occupation. Both the Courts below after considering and analyzing the evidence in detail, have come to the conclusion that Respondent No.1 reasonably and bona-fide required the suit premises for his own use and occupation and that it is Respondent No.1 who would face greater hardship than the Petitioner if the reliefs sought were not granted.